MOHAMMAD IDREES Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Though matter is listed for Orders, by consent of learned counsel appearing for parties, it is taken up for final disposal.

(2.) I have heard the arguments of Sri Ameet Kumar Deshpande, learned counsel appearing for petitioners and Smt. Archana P. Tiwari, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 5, Sri Liyaqat Fareed Ustad, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3 and Sri Gururaj Rao Kakkeri, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.6. Respondent No.4 is served and unrepresented.

(3.) Petitioners have sought for quashing of order dated 14.07.2016 passed by second respondent in Enquiry No.KSBA/ENQ/40/GBA/2015 (Annexure-K) whereunder petitioners have been restrained by an order of temporary injunction from putting up any construction in the property said to have been purchased by the petitioners under registered sale deeds dated 14.03.2000 and 15.03.1979, whereunder petitioners claim to have purchased portion of land bearing Sy.No.12 situated at Hirapur village, Gulbarga Taluk and District, namely, the lands which are morefully described in the said sale deeds. Petitioners are said to have commenced construction in the lands which they have purchased and at that point of time, a complaint came to be lodged by sixth respondent herein alleging that land bearing Sy.No.12/1 measuring 17 acres has been notified by Waqf Board as a Waqf property and it is attached to Hirapur Masjid (Sunni) and petitioners are putting up illegal construction over said property. Pursuant to same, notice came to be issued on 29.12.2015 (Annexure-J) whereunder the second respondent proposed to hold an enquiry and as such, called upon petitioners to appear before the Enquiry Officer. Representative of petitioners is said to have appeared through Advocate before the enquiry officer and have sought for time to file objections to the complaint. The Presiding Officer by impugned order dated 14.07.2016 has restrained the petitioners from putting up any construction or carrying construction activities on the ground that it is a waqf property and same is under enquiry. Hence, petitioners are before this Court challenging said order.